Navigate:

More gridlock for transportation?

The biggest race facing members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee this cycle was the contest between the committee’s top Democrat, Rep. Nick Rahall of West Virginia, and his challenger, Rick Snuffer.

Rahall managed to avoid the fate of the former chairman of the committee, Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.), who was knocked off by Republican Rep. Chip Cravaack, who lost a difficult race this year. Unlike Oberstar, who political observers believe didn’t take his challenger seriously until it was too late, Rahall went all in on his contest from the outset and managed to hold on to his seat.

Text Size

-

+

reset

The committee is expected to have new leadership as its current chairman, Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), is term-limited out of his gavel. Pennsylvania Rep. Bill Shuster is widely expected to take his place. Shuster is a reliable Republican who has been concerned with fiscal restraint while also preaching the gospel of infrastructure investment. He also took a run at privatizing Amtrak earlier this year, an effort that had to be abandoned in the face of dissatisfaction from industry, labor and even some Republicans.

In the Senate, the Environment and Public Works Committee, which will write much of the highway financing mechanisms for the next transportation bill, will have a new leadership dynamic at play. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who was instrumental in pushing through the last bill, is expected to be partnered with Sen. David Vitter (R-La.). Vitter will replace Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), the current ranking member on the committee, as Inhofe is term-limited from the leadership spot at year’s end.

Vitter is not as vocal a booster for infrastructure spending as Inhofe has been, though he has trumpeted the benefits of the last transportation bill back home. And Vitter was involved in writing the bill last time around, which he co-sponsored and praised. But how he and Boxer may work together as they write the next bill remains to be seen.

Vitter will be well-positioned to advocate for inclusion of some sort of life cycle cost analysis for transportation projects in the next bill. He’s been a vocal proponent of the practice, which prices into the creation of a project not only the construction costs but also repair and maintenance over many decades. Vitter had introduced a bill that would’ve required a life cycle cost analysis of projects with a federal cost share exceeding $5 million.

Readers' Comments (1)

That "fix-it-first" mantra will come in for a lot of criticism from political insiders in many States and particularly local development proponents in most all metropolitan areas which have long relied upon the new-alignment highway construction machine funded through the Federal-Aid Highway Program to provide opportunities for development plays on a recurring basis, but it represents a badly needed paradigm realignment and refocus of available transportation funding toward rehabilitation, reconstruction and better maintenance of the road networks built over the past century.

Before any new legislation moves forward, that fix-it-first priority should be clearly established as the primary guidance to States on all projects to be funded through the newly reorganized TIFIA program as was established in MAP-21 with significantly relaxation of environmental clearance requirements.